History of Home's Tragedy of Douglas.

193

Christianity altogether. But his friends prevailed. Once settled, Carlyle, as we have said, took his side with the moderates. When the famous controversy about the Douglas tragedy, written by his clerical friend Home, came up, he took part with his friend, and exposed himself to much sharp criticism by so doing. We have an account in one part of this narrative of the process through which this once popular, but now obsolete performance, attained its perfection.

'It was from his having heard Mrs. Janet Denoon, Mr. Hepburn's sister-in-law, sing the old ballad of Gil Morrice,' that he [Home] first took his idea of the tragedy of Douglas, which, five years afterwards, he carried to London-for he was but an idle composer-to offer it for the stage, but with the same bad success as formerly. The length of time he took, however, tended to bring it to perfection; for want of success, added to his natural openness, made him communicate his compositions to his friends, whereof there were some of the soundest judgment, and of the most exquisite taste. Of the first sort there were Drs. Blair and Robertson, and Mr. Hew Bannatine; and of the second, Patrick Lord Elibank, the Hepburn family, and some young ladies with whom he and I had become intimate-viz., Miss Hepburn, of Monkriggs, Lord Milton's niece; Miss Eliza Fletcher, afterwards Mrs. Wedderburn, his youngest daughter; and Miss Campbell, of Carrick, at that time their great friend. As Home himself wrote a hand that was hardly legible, and at that time could ill afford to hire an amanuensis, I copied Douglas several times over for him-which, by means of the corrections of all the friends I have mentioned, and the fine and decisive criticisms of the late Sir Gilbert Elliot, had attained to the perfection with which it was acted; for at this time Home was tractable, and listened to our remarks.'

But after all this elaboration, and a journey to London on the part of its author to make friends in its favour, Douglas was not accepted for the London stage, and the scandal of a popular tragedy by a clergyman was to be perpetrated in Edinburgh. And popular it was. Not only all the literati of the city, but even grave judges, as well as clergymen, were seen in the theatre. Carlyle would have abstained from being present, but taunted by his friends with want of firmness, he was in the theatre at the third performance; and subsequently wrote a satirical pamphlet in defence of what was doing, under the title of An Argument to prove that the tragedy of Douglas ought to be publicly burnt, by the hands of the Hangman.' With such a title, the pamphlet passed into the hands of the opponents of the playgoers, and the case on the other side was insinuated almost before they were aware of it. We who write in the latter half of the nineteenth century, are of opinion that the minister of Inveresk might have been more consistently employed. The

NO. LXV.

defence of dramatical representations in themselves, and with certain restrictions, is easy. The defence of them with all the adjuncts which have been always connected with them in modern times is another matter, and, unhappily, a divorce between the thing and its adjuncts has been found impossible.

Our author has something to say concerning his great contemporary David Hume, whom he describes as of a social and benevolent temper, and truly the best natured man in the world.'

"I was one of those who never believed that David Hume's sceptical principles had laid fast hold on his mind, but thought that his books proceeded rather from affectation of superiority aud pride of understanding and love of vainglory. I was confirmed in this opinion, after his death, by what the Honourable Patrick Boyle, one of his most intimate friends, told me many years ago at my house in Musselburgh, where he used to come and dine the first Sunday of every General Assembly, after his brother, Lord Glasgow, ceased to be Lord High Commissioner. When we were talking of David, Mrs. Carlyle asked Mr. Boyle if he thought David Hume was as great an unbeliever as the world took him to be? He answered, that the world judged from his books, as they had a right to do: but he thought otherwise, who had known him all his life, and mentioned the following incident: When David and he were both in London, at the period when David's mother died, Mr. Boyle hearing of it, soon after went into his apartment-for they lodged in the same house when he found him in the deepest affliction and in a flood of tears. After the usual topics of condolence, Mr. Boyle said to him, 'My friend, you owe this uncommon grief to your having thrown off the principles of religion; for if you had not, you would have been consoled by the firm belief that the good lady, who was not only the best of mothers, but the most pious of Christians, was now completely happy in the realms of the just.' To which David replied, Though I threw out my speculations to entertain and employ the learned and metaphysical world, yet in other things I do not think so differently from the rest of mankind as you may imagine.' To this my wife was a witness. This conversation took place the year after David died, when Dr. Hill, who was to preach, had gone to a room to look over his notes,'

The friends of Hume seem to think that they are doing service to his memory by representing him in this manner, as less a sceptic in reality than in appearance. But what is the drift of such representation? Is it not, that to gratify the vanity of authorship, a man could write so as to imperil the great principles of religion and morality? To suppose that the conclusions towards which all Hume's speculations tended were, after all, conclusions which he was prepared to admit were possibly, and even probably false, is to charge him with levity and want of

Hume-his Defenders and his Habits.

195

principle as no enemy has done. To scatter firebrands after this manner, and then coolly to say-'Am I not in sport?'-is a course of proceeding not to be reconciled with wisdom, with honesty, or with humanity. It seems very likely, however, that the case really so stood, especially in the early part of his career. The dogmatism of the theologians had given the philosopher great offence. He found, as many men of his order have found, an exquisite pleasure in perplexing and annoying such people, by questioning everything they were wont to regard as unquestionable. And when once a man surrenders himself to this mood, the habit formed, like all habits, grows by indulgence, until the feeling of certainty comes to be to the mind as a sense of restraint-of bondage. So men who learn to love doubt more than truth, are often given up to the worship of the idol they have chosen. Hume, in this respect, was the type of a class of minds, not numerous, but always existing. The following sketch of Hume's private habits will be interesting to some of our readers.

'At this period, when he first lived in Edinburgh, and was writing his History of England, his circumstances were narrow, and he accepted the office of Librarian to the Faculty of Advocates, worth 407. per annum. But it was not for the salary that he accepted this employment, but that he might have easy access to the books in that celebrated library; for, to my certain knowledge, he gave every farthing of the salary to families in distress. Of a piece with this temper was his curiosity and credulity, which were without bounds, a specimen of which shall be afterwards given when I come down to Militia and the Poker. His economy was strict, as he loved independency; and yet he was able at that time to give suppers to his friends in his small lodging in the Canongate. He took much to the company of the younger clergy, not from a wish to bring them over to his opinions— for he never attempted to overturn any man's principles-but they best understood his notions, and could furnish him with literary conversation. Robertson and John Home and Bannatine and I lived all in the country, and came only periodically to the town. Blair and Jardine both lived in it, and suppers being the only fashionable meal at that time, we dined where we best could, and by cadies assembled our friends to meet us in a tavern by nine o'clock; and a fine time it was when we could collect David Hume, Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, Lord Elibank, and Drs. Blair and Jardine, on an hour's warning. I remember one night that David Hume, who, having dined. abroad, came rather late to us, and directly pulled a large key from his pocket, which he laid on the table. This he said was given him by his maid Peggy (much more like a man than a woman) that she might not sit up for him, for she said when the honest fellows came in from the country, he never returned home till after one o'clock. This intimacy of the young clergy with David Hume enraged the zealots on the

opposite side, who little knew how impossible it was for him, had he been willing, to shake their principles.

'As Mr. Hume's circumstances improved, he enlarged his mode of living, and instead of the roasted hen and minced collops, and a bottle of punch, he gave both elegant dinners and suppers, and the best claret, and, which was best of all, he furnished the entertainment with the most instructive and pleasing conversation, for he assembled whosoever were most knowing and agreeable among either the laity or clergy. This he always did, but still more unsparingly when he became what he called rich. For innocent mirth and agreeable raillery I never knew his match. Jardine, who sometimes bore hard upon him-for he had much drollery and wit, though but little learning-never could overturn his temper. Lord Elibank resembled David in his talent for collecting agreeable companions together, and had a house in town for several winters chiefly for that purpose.'

But we must bring our account of this volume to a close. The union between England and Scotland was a great event to our neighbours north of the Tweed. The advance made by the mind of Scotland in the next half century was amazing; and the impulse has lasted, and will last. Down to the time of Elizabeth, Scotland was the tool always ready to be used by France against England. Scotchmen looked on this policy as based on the laws of self-preservation. But it was a policy which entailed heavy penalties. The accession of James I. might have been expected to ensure the speedy union of the two kingdoms. But the prejudices and bad blood which the strifes of centuries had generated, were not to be soon subdued. The Stuart dynasty had to be cast out, before England and Scotland could be made one. The space in Scottish history over which this autobiography extends, is not more than from thirty to forty years. But those years immediately precede the year 1770, and are of much interest to Englishmen, and especially to Scotchmen.

ART. VII.-(1.) Hétérogénie: ou, Traité de la Génération Spontanée. Par F. A. POUCHET, Correspondant de l'Institut, &c. &c. Paris.

1859.

(2.) Spontaneous Generation: From the Cyclopædia of Anatomy and Physiology.' By ALLEN THOMSON, M.D.

(3.) Organisation, Systematische und Geographische Verhältnisse der Infusionsthierchen. By M. EHRENBERG. Berlin. 1836.

FROM the monad to man, the transition is easy and natural, according to the summary developmental hypotheses so popular in the present day; but 'Whence comes the monad?' is a question liable to prove a stumbling-block to the theorists. Given your elementary organic atoms or globules-and what is more easy than to'select' and sort these, until you get the biggest and strongestfrom which to make mollusca? Having got thus far, you need only by degrees introduce vertebræ, and sundry organs and appendages, varying strictly according to the habits and requirements of the creature, and you naturally and inevitably arrive at the higher animals, and lastly (so far as we are yet taught) at man himself. The process, although long, is simple in the extreme, judging from the recent revelations; and has this great merit, that it requires no officious interference of a First Cause; all these wonderful results being due to the unalterable operations of the 'laws of Nature. These laws being manifestly sufficient, how unscientific it is to ask for, or introduce, a Creator! Nec Deus intersit;-and so complete and self-sustained is the whole system (to believe its expounders), that he would almost appear unnecessarily captious who, albeit quite unconvinced by the arguments, should yet for once concede the whole theory of development by law from one primary organic atom, and merely ask who gave the law, and who made this wonderful atom, with its receptivity, its varied adaptability, and its unlimited capacity for development? Yet, until these questions are satisfactorily answered, no 'natural selection,' no struggle for existence,' will enable us to exclude the Creator from His works.

It is evident that a question of this urgency, whether considered as bearing upon abstract science, or upon natural theology, cannot be allowed by the developmentarians to rest there. The monad, the primary organic germ, must be accounted for; and it must be shown to be evolved from brute inorganic matter by the operation of natural laws, which laws are positive and invariable, or his carefully constructed pantheistic system will tumble to pieces, like a child's tower of cards, when the foundation is touched. Hence have arisen the various attempts that have been from time to time made, to show that an organic cell might originate from the